Downtown:Everything's Waiting for You

Petula Clark was on to something when she sang the praises of “Downtown.” We recently posted on the Landmark Society’s conference focusing on the reuse of upper floors of downtown buildings for housing. But in translating those policies to Geneva, we often hear people say “if malls don’t need housing above their shops to be successful, neither do we.” But does research into planning show this to be a good attitude? Not really.

In the late 1990s, downtown zoning was changed to prohibit the development of anything other than one bedroom ‘lofts’ in downtown buildings. Those buildings that already had 2 and 3 bedroom units were ‘grandfathered’ in, but many upper floor apartments were vacated (either voluntarily or by an order from code enforcement) and have not been redeveloped.

The arguments against downtown housing have been varied. From “kids shouldn’t have pavement as a backyard” to “there’s not enough parking,” many people seem to have a reason to keep the upper floors vacant. Four years ago, city council brought the issue up for discussion at a public meeting. It seemed that most people agreed that ‘high end housing’ would be good for downtown, but at the time it didn’t seem that there was a interest in really developing that, so more pressing issues took center stage and the suggested code revisions fell by the wayside.

But more and more we are seeing a reinvestment in downtown, and many of the new owners and developers are from out of town. People who are accustomed to city living are looking at downtown as a great place to live and work. It’s easy to see why people would be drawn to the upper floors of those buildings--the view of the city and the lake is incredible and the architectural features of the buildings can’t be easily replicated in new construction.

As was discussed at the Landmark Society’s conference, there is a need to get these historic buildings back into full use. The owners deserve the ability to utilize all of their square footage, the buildings deserve to be used to their full potential, and the community deserves a vibrant, liveable downtown that is inviting even after the professional offices are closed for the day.

Of course there are families who live in cities all over the country, whose children enjoy safe, healthy, and happy childhoods in downtown districts. In fact, in a time when parents are sometimes leery to send their children outside to play, being close to amenities like the library, playgrounds, and the skating rink might provide better opportunities for childhood recreation. So, we don’t rule out families as residents of downtown apartments.

But recent market studies show that the trend in downtown living is not just the young professionals or urban families that you might think of. Instead, retirees and ‘empty nesters’ are increasingly drawn to city centers because they want to be ‘where it’s at.’ A wide selection of restaurants right outside your door, a short walk to entertainment options, a weekly trip to the Farmer’s Market, summertime lakefront concerts just outside your door. These are the things that draw people back into cities and, specifically, into the upper floors of downtown buildings.

And we know that across economic, social, and other demographic groups, homeownership is usually preferable to rental with regard to property maintenance, neighborhood investment and general quality of life, so we are not saying that the solution for downtown is to create a glut of apartments in every available building. Instead, the City should work with the Business Improvement District to explore a variety of housing options, from condominiums to co-ops to ‘tenancy in common’ arrangements and rentals, too. A mix of housing options and styles will attract the diversity of residents to the downtown area that will benefit the business district, the tourism industry, and the city’s bottom line.